Tommy Kronkvist

There are archives of this talk page:
2012–2014		2020
2015–2016		2021
2017–2018		2022
2019–2019		2023–2024
The archives are searchable:

Hey!

Hey, that wasn’t very nice! Iacowriter (talk) 03:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

@Iacowriter: It's not a question of being nice, it's a question of sticking to the facts and acknowledging what has actually happened. In order to do so, let's walk through the chain of events, so far:

1. As you know, yesterday you made a request for unblocking your Wikispecies user account. You did that in this thread on the user UtherSRG's Wikispecies talk page. However, your Wikispecies user account is not blocked, hence it's of course impossible to unblock it... For reference, you can check the block log of your Wikispecies user account here. As you can see, the block log is empty – in other words you have never been blocked here at Wikispecies. You are however blocked at Wikipedia (log here), which leads us to the second point:
2. As an answer to your unblock request per yesterday, user UtherSRG responded (quote) "Please go to your English Wikipedia talk page and request to be unblocked there, via the link in the block notice", followed by "Use the link in the block notice".
   You then asked "Sorry, where’s the link?" and this time it was me who answered you: "The block notice UtherSRG refers to can't be found here at Wikispecies, but rather on the wiki where you were blocked, i.e. the English language version of Wikipedia. More precisely on your user talk page there, which you can reach from this link: User talk:Iacowriter: December 2024."
   That last link I provided, is a direct link to "the link in the block notice" that UtherSRG refers to.
3. You then continues: "I can’t put up a new thing on my talk page because I’m @ here that’s why I did it here." This is not correct. As of this writing you have only made a total of nine edits here at Wikispecies, and all of them have been on user talk pages, requesting to be unblocked from Wikispecies (which is impossible, since you're not blocked here). For reference, you can check the log of all of your Wikispecies edits here. Please compare that to the edit count in the Global log of all your wiki accounts, and you will find that all of your other edits are indeed made on Wikipedia: a total of 3,046 edits since July 2022.

So to conclude (again): please use the link in the block notice on you Wikipedia talk page in order to request an unblocking from Wikipedia. You can't do it from here at Wikispecies, since you're not blocked here. –Tommy Kronkvist, 05:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC).

Fine. thank you for the link. Just please never say that again. Iacowriter (talk) 05:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Apologies and thank you

I apologize, I thought you were the one telling them to block me, I didn’t know it was that other person. Thank you for sticking up for me. Iacowriter (talk) 01:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Loomis, 1959a

Hello Keith Edkins! Thank you for creating the {{Loomis, 1959a}} template (and others). Regarding that particular template, you've added Chondrodesmus alleni to the list of new names. In MilliBase (here) I could also find this list:

• Caraibocyclus Loomis, 1959
  • accepted as Haplocyclodesmus Attems, 1940 (original description)
• Chondrodesmus alleni Loomis, 1959
  • accepted as Chondrodesmus allenae Loomis, 1959 (original description)
• Orthoporus absconsus Chamberlin, 1922 (additional source)
• Polydesmus coarctata De Saussure, 1860
  • accepted as Asiomorpha coarctata (De Saussure, 1860); accepted as Orthomorpha coarctata (Saussure, 1860) (additional source)

Do you think that any of them should be added to your template? May be not all of them as "New names", but perhaps as "Mentions" (or similar)?
–Tommy Kronkvist, 10:26, 10 January 2025 (UTC).
(The previous note was copied from User talk:Keith Edkins#Template:Loomis, 1959a in order to keep the discussion in one single thread.)

Thanks for the note. The reason I was looking at this paper was to check the source of Caraibocyclus - it is not in this paper but in {{Loomis, 1959c}} - and should be spelt Caribocyclus. I'm not aware that anybody has ever listed "mentions" on Templates and I wouldn't want to try to create a precedent here. I have changed the new species entry to Chondrodesmus allenae as the species is dedicated to a Mrs Allen. Keith Edkins (Talk) 10:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

@Keith Edkins: I've seen "mentions" and similar in a few reference templates, but it's rare and I agree with you that we shouldn't try to set a new standard or praxis here – at least not without a prior discussion at the Village Pump. However, perhaps a link to the MilliBase page (or equivalent) could be a good thing, in order to have the list of taxa readily available? –Tommy Kronkvist, 11:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC).

Tack

Hej Tommy, ursäkta att det blev lite fel när jag lade till svenska namn för Avena. Jag hade inte koll på att bara ett namn bör läggas till enligt Wikispecies riktlinjer, så tack för putsen av mitt inlägg. Med vänlig hälsning, Höstblomma (talk) 12:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

I need your help!

I made a new template for the superfamily Geomyoidea and I originally put in “subordo” instead of “Superfamilia” and then I fixed that however when I click on the families they belong to the taxonavigation box still says “subordo:Geomyoidea” and not “Superfamilia:Geomyoidea”. Can you help me fix this, please? The editor 2345 (talk) 17:39, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Never mind, I fixed it! The editor 2345 (talk) 18:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Warning user

How do you warn users? Cactusisme (talk) 09:55, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Cactusisme. We do have some user warning templates, however adding a note to the Administrators' Noticeboard (as you did) is probably the most effective method. The Policy itself can be found here. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 10:43, 31 January 2025 (UTC).

Thanks Cactusisme (talk) 11:31, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

@Tommy Kronkvist Please delete Template:I found out dinos are cool Cactusisme (talk) 09:44, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

The page was deleted by another admin at 10:54, 3 April 2025. –Tommy Kronkvist, 17:29, 4 April 2025 (UTC).

yes I know, thanks Cactusisme (talk) 02:45, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Taxon Identifier Box

I am sorry, I thought consensus was to use the Reference Section for citations used to construct the taxon page. However, you seem to wish to use the Taxon Box for this. I refer to you removing my edits on Cissus discolor. I think this needs to go to the pump, as it will affect numerous taxon pages. Meanwhile I have reverted your edits pending a new consensus. Thanks Andyboorman (talk) 11:12, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello Andy! I've now checked for example Wikispecies:Village Pump/Archive 53#TaxonBar - what is it good for?, and find that your are correct. Hence I don't object to you adding the POWO and GRID reference templates back. I do however disagree with your deletion of the author templates in the "Synonyms" section, so per the Help:Name section#Author templates guideline I've added them back. Hope you find this okay?

So then, back to issue regarding templates in the "Reference section" versus links in the "Taxon identifiers" box created by the {{Taxonbar}} template. As I said, I do agree with your opinion. However, I don't find that the discussion in the Village Pump back in 2020 address the matter in enough detail. After all, that old discussion primarily ended up in a poll whether we should use the Taxonbar template at all, not how it should be implemented in regards to other material on our taxon pages. Bringing it up at the Village Pump is therefore a good idea, and I will most likely support your opinions there. Also, I think it's important that we add the outcome of those future Pump talks to the Taxonbar template documentation. Right now the documentation says nothing about this.

–All the best, Tommy Kronkvist, 16:47, 10 February 2025 (UTC).

Sorry about missing out the the author templates. I will request a discussion on the Pump regarding the Taxonbar and Reference section in due course. Thanks Andyboorman (talk) 18:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

BHL templates

...Just curious, any particular reason you replaced {{BHL page}} with {{BHL}} on templates such as Template:Crosskey, 1980? I also see there's a merge notice at Template:BHL page/doc, but I don't understand why a merge is needed (maybe I forgot about a past Village Pump discussion about this). Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@Monster Iestyn: As stated in the documentation for the BHL template:

This template is primarily meant to be used to refer to an entire article or publication at BHL.
When referring to a specific page within such an article or publication, please use the BHL page template instead.

Consequently and in reverse, I find it logical to only use the BHL page template when actually referring to a specific page number. Hence I changed the template, since Template:Crosskey, 1980 refers to the entire book and not to a specific page.

As for the merge request, it was added to both templates by our administrator @Burmeister in September 2023. He didn't start a discussion about the request on either one of the template's talk pages, nor was it discussed in the Village Pump at around that time (Wikispecies:Village Pump/Archive 65).
–Tommy Kronkvist, 10:40, 20 February 2025 (UTC).

Use of the Taxonavigation

Hello Kronkvist,

I noticed your recent edit on the Stibochiona nicea wangyukunae, where you updated the Taxonavigation to a more closely rank.

However, I had attempted a similar modification previously, but it resulted in "Template:Stibochiona nicea" instead.

Could you kindly share how you managed to implement the correct Taxonavigation?

Regards,

Li HZLinSichuan (talk) 13:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello @HZLinSichuan. We don't use Taxonavigation templates for the lowest rank, only for the second lowest rank. Hence creating Template:Stibochiona nicea is okay, but not "Template:Stibochiona nicea wangyukunae" (since there isn't any taxon lower than Stibochiona nicea wangyukunae).

As a consequence, we usually don't create Taxonavigation templates for the species level, since most species doesn't have a lower rank (i.e. subspecies, varietas or forma). As such Stibochiona nicea is an exception (since it has subspecies).

In order to explain how I did, I must first ask whether you edit using the so called "VisualEditor", or in plain text mode, showing the clean source code? Using the plain text mode may perhaps look a bit more complicated, but it will give you a lot more control. You can compare the two modes here, using the Stibochiona nicea wangyukunae page as an example: VisualEditor, versus Source text.

You can read more about the VisualEditor and it's functions on MediaWiki, here: VisualEditor/Portal. You can enable or disable the VisualEditor in your Wikispecies user preferences, here: Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing.

–Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 11:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC).

Thanks Kronkvist.

I only use the plain text mode, since I even not know the existence of the VisualEditor.

Thanks for your response.

All the best, Li HZLinSichuan (talk) 11:26, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello!

I was wondering if there are any useful gadjets on this wikimedia? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 04:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cactusisme: All of the available gadgets can be found (and activated) in the "Gadgets" section of your user preference settings. You may also want to have a look in the "Beta features" section. –Tommy Kronkvist, 10:54, 5 April 2025 (UTC).

Scripts? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 04:38, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cactusisme: As far as I know we don't have any (user) scripts that are specific for Wikispecies. However, as in any Wikimedia project you can of course add your own, as long as they follow the rules and policies, and doesn't include any malicious code. As you know, you can add them from the Appearance tab in your user preferences. Here are two of mine, for comparison/inspiration.

• Global.js (at Meta-Wiki = global, for all the Wikimedia wikis)
• Commons.js (local, i.e. limited to Wikispecies)

Some of the scripts included in the above examples might be a bit outdated, since I don't rely heavily on using any scripts here. Also, please note that you can't edit any other user scripts than the ones related to your own user account (only Interface administrators can do that, eg. myself and user Koavf). –Tommy Kronkvist, 18:25, 13 April 2025 (UTC).

Okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:29, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

20 year group

Lol I saw the 20 year group well I have about a year to go, first edit by me is: 14:18, 25 June 2006; Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 22:40, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes I know @Scott, I checked every "member" of the Fifteen Year Society prior to creating the 20 year ditto. Next up to join me in the Twenty Year Society is @Andy Mabbett (first edit 19 August 2005), and you're standing in the doorway.  Among us admins, the oldest "Wikispeciæ emeritus" is @Dan Koehl who made his first edit in 29 November 2004 (i.e. exactly six months before me: 29 May 2005). Shortly after Dan @MPF entered the scene, making his first edit in 21 February 2005. There are also at least three other still active (non-admin) users that could opt to enter the society: I'll send them an invitation! –Tommy Kronkvist, 11:48, 28 April 2025 (UTC).